PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 2301076

[Costs and cost analysis].

Abstract

The costs of an activity is frequently the most conspicuous part in decision making when changes in health care services are considered. It is thus essential to be aware of the principles and considerations underlying the composition of costs. The concept of cost is not restricted to expenditures that have to be paid. It involves the notion of opportunity cost i.e. the cost of a service is the satisfaction or benefit foregone in not being able to use the resources involved to obtain some other service which is also desirable and therefore also provides satisfaction. Strictly, this relates to the best alternative way of using the resources. In order to estimate the costs of an activity, all costs, whether direct or indirect, tangible or intangible, ought to be taken into account. The fact that they may be difficult to measure a value is no excuse for ignoring them. In a cost analysis the result has to be assessed in the light of the types of costs employed and the aim of the analysis. Average cost is very often used, but is seldom the relevant costs. What is normally of concern is the cost of some change. Only by using marginal costs i.e. those costs that actually do change is it possible to obtain a true picture of resource consequences of that change. Regardless of the type of cost it is necessary to consider on whom the costs fall and to whom the benefits accrue. These may not be the same.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

B Danneskiold-Samse, A Alban, K M Pedersen. 1990-01-29. [Costs and cost analysis].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2301076/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Predicting costs of mental health care: a critical literature review.

BACKGROUND: Cost evaluation research in the mental health field is being increasingly recognized as a way to achieve a more effective deployment of scarce resources. However, there is a paucity of studies that seek to identify predictors of psychiatric service utilization and costs. This paper aims to critically review the published research in the field of psychiatric service utilization and costs, and discusses current methodological developments in this field. METHOD: Sixteen studies were identified and are critically reviewed. RESULTS: No single variable alone can explain variations in costs between patients; instead, a range of different clinical and non-clinical variables provides a greater explanation of cost variations. Having a history of previous psychiatric service use is the most consistent predictor of higher psychiatric costs. Only one study considers indirect costs incurred by users, their families and friends and society as a whole, with the remaining 15 studies focusing on direct mental health care costs. There is a lack of studies that consider the future psychiatric service utilization and costs of care of children and older people. The cross-validation of predictive models is not yet routine, with only four of the studies including a cross-validation procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The predictive approach in mental health cost evaluation has relevance for both mental health policy and practice. However, there is a paucity of studies that focus on children, older people and indirect costs. Furthermore, there remain a number of methodological challenges to address.

Costs and Cost Analysis↗

The increasing cost of the basic foods required to promote health in Queensland.

OBJECTIVE: To assess changes in the cost and availability of a standard basket of healthy food items (the Healthy Food Access Basket [HFAB]) in Queensland over time. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: A series of four cross-sectional surveys (in 1998, 2000, 2001 and 2004) describing the cost and availability of foods in the HFAB over time. In the latest survey, 97 Queensland food stores across the five Australian Bureau of Statistics remoteness categories were compared. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost comparisons for HFAB items by remoteness category for the 97 stores surveyed in 2004; changes in cost and availability of foods in the 81 stores surveyed since 2000; comparisons of food prices in the 56 stores surveyed in 1998, 2000, 2001 and 2004. RESULTS: In 2004, the Queensland mean cost of the HFAB was $395.28 a fortnight. The cost of the HFAB was 29.6% ($113.89) higher in "very remote" areas than in "major cities" (P < 0.001). Between 2001 and 2004, the Queensland mean cost of the HFAB increased by 14.0% ($48.45), while in very remote areas the cost increased by 18.0% ($76.93) (P < 0.001). Since 2000, the annualised per cent increase in cost of the HFAB has been higher than the increase in Consumer Price Index for food in Brisbane. The cost of healthy foods has risen more than the cost of some less nutritious foods, so that the latter are now relatively more affordable. CONCLUSIONS: Consumers, particularly those in very remote locations, need to pay substantially more for basic healthy foods than they did a few years ago. Higher prices are likely to be a barrier to good health among people of low socioeconomic status and other vulnerable groups. Interventions to make basic healthy food affordable and accessible to all would help reduce the high burden of chronic disease.

Costs and Cost Analysis↗